Il ventaglio di Lady Windermere

Perhaps only Ernst Lubitsch could have created this masterpiece, a play by one of the world's greatest users of words turned into a silent motion picture.

I remember seeing this at the late and very lamented Silent Movie Theatre on Fairfax in Los Angeles, in the 1970s. And I remember marveling then how Lubitsch was able to create such a magnificent work.

Yes, he had the help of superlative actors -- May McAvoy's performance was truly a revelation -- and of course had the basic Wilde play as well as Julien Josephson's adaption, but it's his camera placement and where the actors performed that make this such a wonder.

I cannot recommend too strongly this "Lady Windermere's Fan," but when you go to YouTube, be careful to check out the various editions before you settle down to watch. One is terrible, but the one I saw is great. Worthy of a great movie.

I agree with the other reviewers that Lubitsch did a great job reworking parts of Wilde's play to make it suitable for silent film, and adding some of his signature touches. But I don't think the movie stands up to some of his later pieces, such as "Trouble in Paradise" and "Design for Living" (also reworked from a famous play, to good advantage). "Lady Windermere's Fan" is much more slow-paced, which can make it hard for a modern viewer, and not all of the characters are as interesting. However, the performances are good, especially the marvelous Irene Rich (whose high-fashion costumes are endlessly entertaining), the production values are high, and if you have the patience, you will be rewarded with some nice little bits of Lubitsch's social observation. It's interesting to consider how drastically attitudes toward male-female relations have changed over the decades: the film's plot depends on beliefs that have mostly, and rightfully, vanished. In contrast to convention, Lubitsch obviously enjoyed helping Rich create an older woman who was fascinating and sexually powerful.

At first it might not seem as if the combination of Ernst Lubitsch and Oscar Wilde would work very well, but this silent-screen adaptation of Wilde's "Lady Windermere's Fan" is both enjoyable and well-crafted. Instead of clashing, Lubitsch's stylish, mischievous approach and Wilde's perceptive cynicism complement each other. The characters and the story are Wilde's, the acting and the style are Lubitsch's.

Although the material is heavily re-worked from the original play, Lubitsch's decisions all seem to work pretty well. Wilde's witty and resourceful dialogue is gone, but his insightful portrayals of human nature remain. Lubitsch also makes good use of the camera to bring off some shots that could not have worked on the stage. In particular, at times he makes the fateful fan seem almost a full-fledged part of the cast.

This movie version features solid performances by May McAvoy and Bert Lytell as the Windermeres, with a youngish-looking Ronald Colman suitably ingratiating as Lord Darlington. But Irene Rich has the most interesting character, and as Mrs. Erlynne she also gives a fine performance that particularly stands out in her scenes with the other characters. She and Lubitsch both capture the nature of her unpopular but admirable character, while carefully setting up the contrasts and conflicts between her and the other characters, who are in general more socially acceptable but far less worthy.

This also works well simply as an entertaining, often very amusing, and sometimes dramatically compelling story. For most silent film fans, it would definitely be worth tracking down and watching.

An epigram-less silent screen version of Oscar Wilde by Ernst Lubitsch is likely to be a contest rather than a collaboration (and not surprisingly Lubitsch wins).

Irene Rich's handsome profile in the role of Mrs Erlynne provides a sight to savour throughout, and the race meet at which we see her from constantly switching viewpoints as people study her through their binoculars is one of the visual & cinematic highlights of the film.

Ernst Lubitsch was a great director with many wonderful films, his early work (his German silents) is more interesting than great but when he hit his stride from the late-20s onwards his very distinctive directing style sparkled at its best. Oscar Wilde was a tremendously influential, perceptive and subversive writer, his work having much drollness and bite. Have for a long time appreciated silent films highly, while there are ones that don't hold up the ones that have are very good and the best landmarks.

'Lady Windermere's Fan' is an interesting Wilde play. It is not one of my favourite works of his, 'The Importance of Being Ernest', 'The Selfish Giant' and 'The Picture of Dorian Grey' connect with me more and am more familiar with them too, but it is unmistakably Wilde in characterisation and prose. This 1925 film adaptation is great on its own terms and even if Lubitsch went on to do even better later 'Lady Windermere's Fan' is by far one of his best and most interesting silent films (and to me one of his first great films).

Don't expect a film that is one hundred percent faithful to the source material. As said, there is a lot of heavy re-working. Not that that is a bad thing, it makes no difference to me actually, but it is merely a word of warning for anybody that thinks the opposite. It also feels more Lubitsch than Wilde, which is not necessarily a bad thing. Absolutely love Lubitsch's directing style, very much in full display, which is full of wit, sophistication and irony.

While Wilde's typically perceptive depiction of humanity and its nature and the insightful approach to his characters remain, there isn't quite enough of his own wit and subversiveness. There is absolutely evidence of them and the two styles generally don't clash surprisingly, but Lubitsch's directing makes more of a splash here.

Visually, 'Lady Windermere's Fan' looks great. Very sumptuously designed and costumed and there are some stylish shots that are expansive enough to avoid it from feeling too much of a filmed play or too claustrophobic. Lubitsch's direction is clever and elegant throughout, no rough around the edges feel or any signs of disinterest. It is very well performed and with more subtlety than a fair share of silent films from this period, with the best performance coming from Irene Rich as the most interesting character. She really does lighten up the screen.

All the conflicts are done with tension but also in a witty and sophisticated fashion, and the actors interact very naturally, no stiffness or disconnection here. The story is fun and charming, any harshness in the conflict done with bite and nuance. It goes at a lively enough pace, helped by that Lubitsch doesn't take the material too seriously, and doesn't get bogged down by staginess or over-reliance on anything that could potentially deaden the pace (i.e. title cards). The characters are interesting and Wilde's perceptive approach towards them is maintained.

On the whole, great. 9/10